By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Nintendo can never seem to satisfy fans

totaly aggred with Reggie : Nintendo Fans always want more and more and never seems to be satisfied. For me, the last E3 was perfect and there is no way to be negative. Nintendo always got a few project on the side and always surprise there fans during the years.



Around the Network
Player1x3 said:
homer said:

Italian plumber jumps and runs from left to right to reach an end to a linear 2D level.

Ape in a tie jumps and runs from left to right to reach an end to a linear 2D level.

 

One has countless superpowers, karmic choices, open world sandbox, side missions, upgrades, XP, USG, separate endings, complete freedom

Other discovers treasures, shoots from cover, has meele scriped events, linear story, linear levels, same outcomes, action sequences., huge attention to detail.

the ONLY, i repeat THE ONLY similaraty between the 2 is that you press L1 to aim. Thats it !

Player1x3 said:

 


The only things Infamous truly has over Uncharted is a flawed karma system and an open world. You fail to see how insignificant the rest are when the games play fundamentally the same. Also, freedom in a cage lol? Uncharted's cage is just much smaller lol.

BOTH have treasures(blast shards much?) Have totally different value and point than treasures. Learn the difference between collectables (which almost every game has) and just treasures

BOTH are third person shooters One shoots bullets from cover, cilmbs, and performs meele attacks. the other fires bolts, lighting strikes, magnitude bombs, shoots fire bombs, ice shields, drains electricity, rides on train rails, flies, hoovers, climbs

BOTH have cover systems In which one game its an important game mechanic which takes about 1/3 of entire gameplay, and in the other, its almost non existent

BOTH have scripted events Just like every game. Infamous is open world btw

BOTH have action sequences Just like every game.

BOTH have QTE's They are barely there in Infamous. That's like saying Dark Souls and Mario are similar because in DkS you have to jump once or twice

Your grasping at straws here bud and some of your post is an outright lie. Lol, you're the one to talk

I don't see how being graphically different matters when you yourself said art style doesn't matter. That's a contradiction isn't it?

When have i said anything about being graphically different???

Shooting mechanics are pretty much the same. Platforming mechanics ARE the same. The rest of the differences are minute at best when you realize they play exactly the same.

No, they are not the same. Cole has much more mobility and flexibility than Drake. Im yet to see Drake firing a thunder strike and taking out the entire street. If by ''same'' you mean you have to hold the button for aim sight to appear, than pretty much every shooters are same. In platforming, again, Cole is much more flexible and mobile than Drake. Not to mention platforming in Uncharted is million times more linear

For the record, o never said Mario and DK aren't similar, you clearly assumed I did. 'm just saying, don't point you finger because every time you, 3 more are pointing back at you.(cheesy, but relevant)

Im arguing that Uncharted and Infamous are 2 completely different series. You suggested they aren't

Lastly, regardless of whether or not you will see the numerous similarites, I think you are misinterpretting what I was trying to say because I didn't hammer it in so I will put it bluntly. Sony doesn't need many franchises with the same exact gameplay because they release multiple sequels over a relatively short period of time.



1.) The differences are really minor. You tried to make it seem like treasures were a big separating difference. How do treasures alter gameplay? They don't they are are a minor feature of the game. Insignificant at best and you tried to tout that as a major difference between the two? That is quite humorous. If every game has a sort of collectible, don't you think it's stupid to claim it's different because it has collectibles whilst ignoring the fact that infamous has a form of collectible...

2.) Again...Cole shoots from cover, climbs, and performs melee attacks. Nathan Drake just uses guns, while Cole uses his finger tips. There isn't much difference here. A lot of Cole's moves are available in weapon form for Nathan Drake. Let's remember he compared DK to Mario and Kirby. Well...Kirby can eat things and float and fly and absorb other abilities. These differences in gameplay mechanics seem to be far greater than those of Infamous and Uncharted even if Uncharted is linear and Infamous isn't. Basic mechanics are the same with minor variance.

3.) Well. Maybe it wouldn't get as much use later in the game when your more agile, but espicially in the beginning and in the first one, the cover system is frequently used, especially on higher difficulty levels. I suppose if you play it on the easiest difficulty you might think you shouldn't use the cover system, but the same could be said for Uncharted too.

4.) You just made me want to facepalm so bad, but I withheld from it because I believe the faceplam is a sacred ritual, one that I have only used once. YOU touted that Uncharted had scripted events and that's what separated uncharted from infamous. I said both have it. Now you agree with me. Why the change of heart lol?

5.) Again, a lesser man would facepalm. Again, you go and contradict yourself. YOU claimed action sequences were what separated Uncharted from Infamous but I don't think you realize, pretty much every game has action sequences. Also that phrase is very vague.

6.)No not really. QTE's are all over Infamous. Espicially when you attack the giant monter's or get knocked down by a medium sized monster and anyone who played infamous 2, knows you encounter them pretty much throughout the entire game. In fact, I would venture to say that I went through more QTE's in Infamous 2 than i did Uncharted 3.

7.) Please. You entered this conversation by trying to tell people their wrong without offering any reasons why. Your past post was unneeded and I believe an indicator of your intelligence.

8.)" Thats your opinnion which is irrelevant to the matter. Art style is also completly irrelevant."     "...huge attention to detail."  That's how you suggested that and it's stupid really but I guess you either forgot about it or agreed with me it was a stupid reason and swept it under the rug.

9.) Cough.... More agile? I agree, but you know what, Mario is more agile than DK and Kirby and isn't this what the core part of the conversation was about or have you forgotten and think I'm just attacking two well received franchises? This difference you listed isn't even considered for them so why should it be considered for these two? I guess you decide if it's a difference worth noting but you can't say it applies to one and not the other because that would make one biased and nobody wants to look like that. Well you don't say. Platforming in Uncharted is more linear than that of an open world game? I agree...for the most part but you seem to forget a lot of the platforming in the original infamous such as, going underneath the bridge(linear), going through the sewers multiple times(obviously linear) and in the second one, going through the Bayou(Also linear). Of course these are exceptions to what generally happens but this does not alter the fact that platforming and climbing is nearly identical. One just gives you options as to what corner to grab. -_- Oooooooooh. I see. One move differentiates Uncharted from Infamous. Then one move woulddifferentiate DK from Mario right? We must be fair right? Well when has Mario ever hit the graound with his fists to cause trouble? Can't be one way for one company and the other for another. As for pretty much every shooter being the same... isn't that what everyone complains about? I thought most people held this belief. Most shooters are the same...

10.) OK. No. That's not going to work for me. You tried to suggest DK and Mario were basically the same game by oversimplifying a comparison but are trying to back out of that view now? No. No sir. I never suggested they weren't different series, I was proving they are more similar than many believe because someone(I don't think it was you) suggested that Nintendo titles were pretty much the same game(where he cherry picked titles) so I cherry picked two titles I played on Sony consoles that were very much similar and compared them. I never said they were copies of each other, just that their basic mechanics and core gameplay are EXTREMELY similar. Any difference, broken karmic system, open world, and the fact that one is a duracell battery doesn't matter in the scope of things when the core gameplay is pretty much the same.



"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." -My good friend Mark Aurelius

Significant_leap said:
"many "core" nintendo franchises play the same to me - ( mario, dk, kirby etc ) run from one side of a stage to another and jump over obstacles on the way..."

Like GT and Motorstorm play the same, going from point A to point B as fast as you can?
lol
nice logic


Fanboy! Altough Kirby and Mario play different you have admit that DK looks the plays the is the same as Mario just woth a brown gorilla.



Jumpin said:
Significant_leap said:
The Gamecube is the best console ever
Metroid prime, Zelda WW and Resident evil series say hi

I am not sure how people can forget so easily how depressingly bad the Gamecube era was; it was a time when even Nintendo's handheld systems were killing their Home Console market in terms of games released. The most exciting games on Gamecube were a cartoonish Zelda that was a step down from the previous Zeldas, Metroid games that cloned Turok Dinosaur Hunter, Dreamcast & Resident Evil ports, and Pikmin; that should tell you something.

To top it off, while all other Nintendo home consoles advanced the industry, the GameCube became the one home console where Nintendo didn't bring anything new or innovative to the table; they just released PS2 jr. A PS2 that was more appealing to children with its purple lunchbox shape and big green button controller.

I did not realize that but you makre  a very good point Jumpin.

The Wii gets chastised for its 'gimmicks'; in the Wii's case the word gimmick had a negative connotation, like it was being used to trick customers into buying a product that really had no substance upon further investigation. However that could not be any farther from the truth!

What was the Gamecube's main draw, what was the hook to bring customers in? Nothing. It did not revolutionize graphics, or methods of gameplay control. As a result of no new interface or control, it was just a PS2 with none of the 3rd party support. Also, it was handicapped by no DVD playback and limited space minidisks. There was no gimmick.

Granted I loved the Gamecube, but that was because of the following titles:

SSB Melee (fighting kids in the neighborhood) Wrestlemania X8,X9, Day of Reckoning 1 & 2, Def Jam Vendetta & Fight for NY, Fire Emblem POR, Resident Evil Remake.

?????



Leatherhat on July 6th, 2012 3pm. Vita sales:"3 mil for COD 2 mil for AC. Maybe more. "  thehusbo on July 6th, 2012 5pm. Vita sales:"5 mil for COD 2.2 mil for AC."

SaviorX said:
Jumpin said:
Significant_leap said:
The Gamecube is the best console ever
Metroid prime, Zelda WW and Resident evil series say hi

I am not sure how people can forget so easily how depressingly bad the Gamecube era was; it was a time when even Nintendo's handheld systems were killing their Home Console market in terms of games released. The most exciting games on Gamecube were a cartoonish Zelda that was a step down from the previous Zeldas, Metroid games that cloned Turok Dinosaur Hunter, Dreamcast & Resident Evil ports, and Pikmin; that should tell you something.

To top it off, while all other Nintendo home consoles advanced the industry, the GameCube became the one home console where Nintendo didn't bring anything new or innovative to the table; they just released PS2 jr. A PS2 that was more appealing to children with its purple lunchbox shape and big green button controller.

I did not realize that but you makre  a very good point Jumpin.

The Wii gets chastised for its 'gimmicks'; in the Wii's case the word gimmick had a negative connotation, like it was being used to trick customers into buying a product that really had no substance upon further investigation. However that could not be any farther from the truth!

What was the Gamecube's main draw, what was the hook to bring customers in? Nothing. It did not revolutionize graphics, or methods of gameplay control. As a result of no new interface or control, it was just a PS2 with none of the 3rd party support. Also, it was handicapped by no DVD playback and limited space minidisks. There was no gimmick.

Granted I loved the Gamecube, but that was because of the following titles:

SSB Melee (fighting kids in the neighborhood) Wrestlemania X8,X9, Day of Reckoning 1 & 2, Def Jam Vendetta & Fight for NY, Fire Emblem POR, Resident Evil Remake.

?????

Microsoft and Sony didn't rely on gimmicks to get the sales they initially attained. I loved the Gamecube even with its handful of great titles.



Around the Network

Savior
"Nothing. It did not revolutionize graphics, or methods of gameplay control. As a result of no new interface or control, it was just a PS2 with none of the 3rd party support"

i dont believe this to be true....the graphics the GC provided with Resident series, Metroid, Starfox etc were by far the best on the industry for years, also the GC received nearly every multiplat until 2006, i dont see the deal there

the GC is the best console ive ever enjoyed and thats MY OPINION, i dont care what anybody says, dont bother guys...:)



S.T.A.G.E. said:

Microsoft and Sony didn't rely on gimmicks to get the sales they've attained. I loved the Gamecube even with its handful of great titles.


?

PS3's main gimmick was Blu-Ray as a media playback device. Previous brand power also helped...

360's was assisted by being the first HD console on the market and the best online infrastructure, Xbox Live.......



Leatherhat on July 6th, 2012 3pm. Vita sales:"3 mil for COD 2 mil for AC. Maybe more. "  thehusbo on July 6th, 2012 5pm. Vita sales:"5 mil for COD 2.2 mil for AC."

SaviorX said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
 

Microsoft and Sony didn't rely on gimmicks to get the sales they've attained. I loved the Gamecube even with its handful of great titles.


?

PS3's main gimmick was Blu-Ray as a media playback device. Previous brand power also helped...

360's was assisted by being the first HD console on the market and the best online infrastructure, Xbox Live.......


Blu Ray isn't a gimmick it's apart of the hardware multimedia aspect of the hardware. It stabalized Blu Ray sales so now we dont have to use multiple discs. It cost Sony second place but ensured an upscaled style of viewing movies with more storage. 

Microsoft didn't care for HD DVD  until they found out Sony was taking them out. They will most likely follow suit with Blu Ray like good little boys.

Sony assisted by Microsoft stabalized DVD prices to mass market value so the format could flourish. The Nintendo Wiimotes, Kinect and Move are gimmicks. The way Sony has handled the Move shows you exactly how much they care.



The wiimote is not a gimmick...motion controls could be....but the wiimote is a controller...still a good gimmick, and it worked, congratulations to Nintendo for that :)



Significant_leap said:
The wiimote is not a gimmick...motion controls could be....but the wiimote is a controller...still a good gimmick, and it worked, congratulations to Nintendo for that :)

All motion controls are a gimmick. They are a novelty used to cash in on casuals. This just so happens to be the most profitable generation for gimmicks out of all the gimmicks Nintendo has tried over the years. The glove, Virtual boy and more speak for themselves.